Leading Republican Candidates Face Uphill Battle Against Democrats

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by AAAintheBeltway, May 7, 2007.

  1. By polling, money raised and media attention, the top tier Republican candidates are Romney, Guiliani and McCain. In recent weeks, McCain has clearly slipped a bit. Of the second tier candidates, Tommy Thompson, Jim Gilmore and Mike Huckabee seem to be the favorites.

    Most years, a Republican ticket with some combination of Romney, Guiliani or Thompson would be virtually unbeatable. They are conservative enough to hold onto the traditional Republican strongholds in the South and West and would put the blue states of the northeast and upper midwest into play. Certainly the Democrats could not afford to lose any of the trio of Massachusetts, NY or Illinois and have a hope of winning.

    Things get more complicated when we examine the likely Democrat ticket of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I doubt that even Guiliani can carry NY against Hillary, and I suspect that even a ticket with Thompson would have trouble carrying his home state, much less Illinois, against the Obama Express. Romney's loss to Ted Kennedy does not auger well for his ability to carry Mass against the liberal duo of Hillary and Obama.

    If Romney and Guiliani cannot put the northeast at least in play, then their complicated positions on issues important to core republican voters, eg abortion and gay rights, begin to look like huge negatives. To win, a republican ticket will have to sweep the red states of the south, plains, southwest and mountain states. Republicans will not be able to risk evangelicals sitting out the race.

    Where does this lead us? Well, which candidates have the best chance of carrying the Bush red states? I think we have to start with Fred Thompson. As a Reaganesque southerner, he could be counted on to keep the south ex-Florida and much of the west in the republican column. If President Bush hadn't already fouled the nest, the ideal running mate would have been brother Jeb Bush, who would deliver Florida. Forget that now. That leaves as the obvious choice, John McCain. Would McCain take the second spot on a Thompson ticket? I think so, and it might be an ideal arrangement. A lot of republicans respect McCain but don't entirely trust his judgment. As VP though, McCain would add a lot of stature to the ticket without the worries of him losing his cool in the Oval Office.
     
  2. You know I love ya AAA...But ...DUH!!!!! :p :p

    The Repubs could run Jesus Christ himself and it would still be a 50-50 vote right now!
     
  3. No doubt. My point is the media is focusing exclusively on the horserace aspect of it. The real issue is who can beat Hillary/Obama. The one question they should be asking Guiliani is can he carry NY? If he can, he should be the nominee. If he can't, he shouldn't be in the conversation. It doesn't matter if you lose NY 50.01 to 49.99 or 70 to 30. You lose, you lose.
     
  4. Don't forget about California, which usually goes Democrat. Giuliani is polling very well there. He is liberal enough to take it. None of the other Repubs have a chance there.
     
  5. Does he have a chance there?
     
  6. Depends who the opponent is. He polls favorably vs Hill and Edwards, but not vs Obama.

    I haven't seen an updated poll for about two months however.

    California is very liberal, but also focussed on economic reform and tax paranoia. They are already taxed to the hilt there (and I am probably moving back there in a few moths, what am I thinking?).

    IF Rudy takes the R nomination (big if as McCain may take Iowa, and will take NH), then NY and Cal are both in play. If either goes red, game over.
     
  7. I have trouble with the concept that a state with a huge hispanic vote and which elected Feinstein, Boxer and Pelosi, will actually be in play for Rudy. He's no Arnold.

    As for NY, I'm sure he can make it close, but again, I just don't see it happening.

    To me, it seems like betting on a very long shot. We'll know the race has gotten serious when the media starts asking these questions instead of who did best at some debate.
     
  8. WRONG WRONG WRONG!!! NY SHOULD NOT BE THE FOCUS!!!...ASK AL GORE, ASK JOHN KERRY!!!!!

    THE SOUTH IS WHAT YOU NEED TO CAPTURE.....
     
  9. False.

    All Hillary/Obama has to do is capture every state Kerry did, and Ohio.

    Ohio is not a southern state.

     
  10. Ohio is never an easy state...it would be much more prudent to capture a couple of Southern states like Tenn. , NC or Ark... then to put everything in Ohio don't you think?
     
    #10     May 8, 2007